National Parks in Scotland including The Cairngorms

NEMT response to SNH (November 1998)

As in the North East Mountain Trust's earlier submission, we support the need for the protection of substantial areas of Scotland's countryside. The consultation paper is a significant step in the right direction and we hope that the final submission to government will retain the thrust of that document. We look forward to seeing specific recommendations, but are keen that there is movement from consultation to implementation early in the life of the new Scottish Parliament.

Other public consultations being undertaken at present have a substantial bearing on this issue. These need to be drawn together to make a coherent whole.

Purposes

The permanent protection of Scotland's Natural Heritage (biodiversity and beauty) is of paramount importance. We urge the pursuit of the highest possible IUCN Category for each area. Some of the core areas in Scotland are worthy of category 2 designation. Outside the core areas, some secondary purposes will take on greater importance, but their pursuit should not be allowed to damage the natural environment. The precautionary approach needs to be emphasised.

There is a need for the restoration or regeneration of some degraded habitats. In other areas, the asset is the wild land itself and no development or provision of facilities is required or desirable. We welcome the recognition that people were or still are an integral part of our landscape. Measures are needed to retain a population in some rural areas. Care will be needed to avoid creeping development, with a little more building with each plan. Zoning would allow development in some areas. It should be easier to see an overall picture with a single Park Body than with multiple Local Authorities.

We see National Parks as the (previously missing) top-tier protection for our Natural Heritage that is integrated with existing designations. Some simplification of these designations is appropriate.

Powers

A full range of powers to protect the designated areas should rest in a single, central, independent body. These will include planning and management powers. We encourage local involvement in the management of the area, from the planning stage onwards.

The current planning powers will need to be extended to include agriculture, rivers, deer and forestry. Management powers are required to regulate activities that are or may be carried out in the Park without new construction (and therefore outside the planning process). Some activities not currently controlled need to come under the control of the Park Body. These will include potentially damaging recreation such as off-road vehicle use (mountain bikes and 4 wheel drive vehicles), fishing, hunting and low-level flying.

We have no confidence in the voluntary principle for conservation management, but support co-operation and co-ordination.

Area

Areas should be designated that have the greatest risk of damage by visitor numbers continuing to rise. This will include the most accessible wild areas, but also the most remote, as few places in Scotland are really remote with today's transport network.

Parks should be sufficiently large to protect the core areas. We envisage coherent areas with special protected core areas. We recognise the value of coastal and inshore habitats and are in favour of one or more Marine Parks.

We only comment specifically on our local area, the Cairngorms. Here, a significant area of the wild land should be protected by designation. Ultimate protection of the core montane area is essential. A larger area also needs to be controlled by the Park Body as activities in this wider area have an impact on the core zone. Different areas of a Cairngorm National Park would require different powers and zoning would be necessary.

The wider area should ideally cover the entire Cairngorm Partnership Board area. We acknowledge that many more management conflicts will arise by inclusion of the lower ground and accept the initial exclusion of the Angus Glens, the Ladder and Drumochter Hills and the Monadh Liath plateau. Mount Keen, Dreish and Beinn a'Ghlo should all lie within the Park.

We are not decided on the best boundaries - rivers, roads and watersheds all have benefits and problems. We do not favour dividing a populated area by using a road or river that runs through it. That could lead to the development of facilities just over the park border that impinge on the protected area. Consequently we favour the inclusion the whole Spey valley (perhaps to the northern skyline) between Laggan and Grantown. The Deeside communities and their representatives will be best placed to judge the balance of benefits against problems of their inclusion in the National Park.

Structure

The Park Body should be independent of all existing bodies and be accountable directly to the Scottish Parliament. It should include elected local members, but remain independent of the Local Authorities. Two thirds local members and one third national (with specific role/expertise) seems appropriate. We think that the chair should be appointed by the First Minister, although this is not without problems.

Powers would be transferred from the Local Authorities, SNH, Forest Enterprise, Historic Scotland and other bodies listed in Table 3-1 (of the consultation paper). Centralisation of powers should allow concentration of skills and a focus on the designated area. Local Authorities should continue to provide many services across their whole area and will need to work closely with the new Park Body.

We support the concept of a Park Plan for management of the National Park. We urge the avoidance of a protracted consultation/preparation phase and hope that much can be built on previous consultations. A rolling five year plan would allow frequent review of the plan. There should be a requirement on public bodies and landowners (may only be possibly through financial incentives) to implement the Park Plan locally. The Park Body should monitor implementation and have last resort enforcement powers. Appropriate mechanisms should be set up for consultation and appeal (to the First Minister).

Finance

New funding will be required if National Parks are to succeed. If payment is made to landowners, it should be for compliance with the Park Plan, not as compensation for limitation of activity. Much funding will need to be central. Charges to visitors and users are fair if set at an appropriate rate. Public initiatives such as lottery funds should not be used for core funding, but may be appropriate for some additional services. Local taxation should only be used after very careful consideration of its disadvantages. The level of funding will be a test of the commitment of the Scottish Parliament to National Parks.

Visitor Management

Visitor numbers are likely to continue to increase. Measures will be required to prevent damage to the environment. We do not support the promotion of the areas for recreation. Sufficient users are attracted without that. Some direction of visitors may be possible. We hope that this could be by zoning and encouraging people into areas that can accommodate the activity rather than by enforcement and prohibition.

Successful visitor management includes appropriate provision of Public Transport.

Education should form a significant part of the Park Body's activities so that people (locals and visitors alike) can appreciate the designated area.


NEMT initial response | NEMT News Page | NEMT Front Page

Please let the webmaster know if there are problems viewing these pages or with the links they contain.